Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3, and 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
For claims 1, 3, and 6, the phrase “and/or” does not distinctly claim whether the limitation is necessary or optional.
For claim 1, it is unclear whether the claimed term “a predefined object” is the same as “the moveable object.” Please clarify antecedent basis for “the moveable object.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 6-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasai (US 2020/0046208) in view of Polchin (US 2023/0363830).
For claim 1, Kasai teaches a computer-implemented method for controlling a surgical microscopy system having a stand and a microscope carried by the stand ([0066] The illustrated medical observation system 1000 is assumed to be used for a medical system for performing intra-abdominal surgery and the like, for example, and a so-called rigid scope is applied therefor. The medical observation system 1000 includes a lens tube 100 and a camera 20), wherein the method comprises:
receiving a user command that requests a configuration of the surgical microscopy system for imaging a predefined object ([0206] In a case where TRACKING or the tracking operation is instructed by the voice command . . . set the user's line of sight or the operation instrument as a target point),
initially determining a target configuration of the surgical microscopy system based on the user command ([0206] In a case where TRACKING or the tracking operation is instructed by the voice command),
controlling at least one component of the surgical microscopy system in order to achieve the target configuration, temporally related with the controlling of the at least one component [0206] . . . an arm operation by which the image shot by the camera 200 tracks and moves to the target point is determined (ST2207)):
determining whether the position and/or orientation of the movable object change(s) within a predefined temporal limit and/or within a predefined spatial limit ([0192] A system parameter generation part 2040 determines a dynamic parameter such as the moving amount of the tip of the arm part 701 (or the oblique-viewing endoscope 100) during the tracking operation on the basis of a voice command detection result, a remote controller state detection result, a user's line of sight detection result, or an operation instrument position detection result by the UI detection part 2020.), and
if the position and/or orientation of the movable object change(s) within the predefined temporal limit and/or within the predefined spatial limit, adapting the target configuration ([0206] In a case where TRACKING or the tracking operation is instructed by the voice command, the user's line of sight is detected by use of the line of sight detection part 2004 such as line of sight detection camera (ST2208), or the position of an operation instrument in an image shot by the camera 200 is detected (ST2209) thereby to set the user's line of sight or the operation instrument as a target point. Then, an arm operation by which the image shot by the camera 200 tracks and moves to the target point is determined (ST2207).).
Kasai does not expressly disclose if the position and/or orientation of the movable object change(s) within the predefined temporal limit.
Polchin teaches teach if the position and/or orientation of the movable object change(s) within the predefined temporal limit [0062] The localizer may detect the pose in some reference frame of compatible devices (i.e. trackable devices, navigation targets) in its viewing space. The localizer may supply this information to the EPU responsive to requests for such information in a quasi-real-time fashion (e.g., 15 times per second in a “polling” method) or at a constant rate even without requires (a “broadcast” method). It would be obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to combine the tracking teachings of Kasai with the temporal tracking teachings of Polchin for the predictable benefit of providing a more closely integrate surgical visualization systems with surgical navigation systems.
For claim 2, Kasai teaches wherein the method furthermore comprises: determining a reference position of the predefined object based on the target configuration initially determined based on the user command ([0112] a reference position (horizontal direction) relative to the direction of gravity is previously defined so that the oblique-viewing endoscope rotation angle acquisition 152 can detect the angle θ.sub.3 relative to the horizontal direction from a detected value of the angle sensor.),
wherein the spatial limit is determined in relation to the reference position ([0113] The camera rotation angle calculation part 156 calculates a rotation angle of the camera rotation apparatus 500 on the basis of the rotation angle of the oblique-viewing endoscope 100 relative to the direction of gravity. The camera rotation angle calculation part 156 can calculate a rotation angle of the camera rotation apparatus 500 with reference to the direction of gravity based on the angle θ.sub.3 acquired by the oblique-viewing endoscope rotation angle acquisition 152.).
For claim 3, Kasai teaches wherein the method furthermore comprises: adapting the reference position based on the adapted target configuration if the position of the movable object changes within the predefined temporal limit and/or the predefined spatial limit ([0071] For example, in a case where a camera visual field 950 corresponding to a shooting amount region of the camera 200 described below is present ahead by a predetermined distance in the optical axis C3 direction from the objective lens part 106, the center of the camera visual field 950 moves along with the rotation around the optical axis C1 of the eyepiece optical system while drawing a rotation movement trajectory indicated by a reference numeral 960.).
For claim 4, Kasai teaches wherein the method furthermore comprises: initially determining the temporal limit based on a period of time for achieving the target configuration initially determined based on the user command ([0085] For example, the arm control part 164 controls driving the arm part 701 in response to an input operation via a user interface (UI) 160 described below as needed, thereby controlling a position and a posture of the medical observation system 1000. By the controlling, the medical observation system 1000 at the distal end of the arm part 701 is moved to any position, and then can be fixedly supported at the position.)
For claim 6, Kasai teaches wherein the method furthermore comprises: determining a type of movable object, wherein the predefined temporal and/or spatial limit depends on the type of predefined object ([0079] In connection with the dimensioning of the temporal and/or spatial limits: It would be possible for their magnitudes to be firmly predefined. However, it would also be possible for their magnitudes to be dynamically determined, for example on the basis of a type of object; a setting of one or more components of the surgical microscopy system, for example magnification of the microscope, working distance, surgical context (for example surgery type), position of the patient, etc. Such techniques are based on the knowledge that certain object types typically have a smaller movement than other object types. This means that the tolerance in connection with the adaptation of the target configuration can be selected to be smaller for such object types than for other object types.).
For claim 7, Kasai teaches wherein the user command requests auto-centering of a field of view of the microscope on the predefined object, wherein the at least one component comprises the at least partially robotic stand ([0073] In FIG. 7, a user command 561 is received (which requests, for example, auto-centring, so that the target configuration can be initially determined, cf. box 3204) and one or more components of the surgical microscopy system are then adjusted in a period of time 563. This period of time may be dependent, for example, on a trajectory travelled by the robotic stand in order to suitably position the head part.).
For claim 8, Kasai teaches wherein the user command requests auto-focusing of an image plane of the microscope on the predefined object, wherein the at least one component comprises an objective optical unit of the microscope and/or the at least partially robotic stand ([0080] Various scenarios can therefore be implemented using the spatial limit and/or the temporal limit. Some exemplary scenarios are discussed below. In a first scenario, the surgeon activates the auto-centring on a particular surgical instrument once. The position and/or orientation of the microscope is/are then calculated on the basis of the current positioning of the surgical instrument in relation to the microscope, that is to say the target configuration for the robotic stand is initially determined. In this context, an area or a volume around this target position or around the tip of the surgical instrument, within which the target pose can be changed during travel, is also defined. This therefore means that the spatial limit is determined in relation to a reference position determined on the basis of the initial target configuration. The robotic movement into the target configuration then begins. The activity of the surgical instrument is continuously evaluated (tracking). The target pose is adapted as long as the tip of the surgical instrument is within the previously calculated area or the previously calculated volume. Upon reaching the target pose, the robotic movement is ended and there is also no further continuous adaptation of the target configuration. This therefore corresponds to a spatial limit in combination with a temporal limit that is defined by actually reaching the target position. In a further scenario, the one-off centring by the surgeon, as already explained above, is activated. A target configuration—for example a target pose of the robotic stand—is then determined. A time, within which the movement of the surgical instrument results in adaptation of the target configuration, is also determined (for example on the basis of the estimated travel time for achieving the target configuration). The robotic movement is then started and the activity of the surgical instrument is continuously evaluated (tracking). The target configuration is adapted during the previously determined temporal limit on the basis of the detected activity. Combinations of these two variants are also conceivable.).
For claims 9 and 11, Kasai and Polchin teach the claimed limitations as described for corresponding limitations in claims 1-8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tripathi; Ashok Burton US 20100217278 A1 REAL-TIME SURGICAL REFERENCE INDICIUM APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR INTRAOCULAR LENS IMPLANTATION
Chuanggui, Zhu US 20050215879 A1 Accuracy evaluation of video-based augmented reality enhanced surgical navigation systems
Liesfeld; Ben et al. US 20110077625 A1 OPHTHALMIC APPARATUS AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME
GELMAN; Shaul Alexander et al. US 20230384734 A1 METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DISPLAYING HOLOGRAPHIC IMAGES WITHIN A REAL OBJECT
Tripathi; Ashok Burton US 20140324071 A1 REAL-TIME SURGICAL REFERENCE INDICIUM APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR ASTIGMATISM CORRECTION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEIL MIKESKA whose telephone number is (571)272-3917. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6a - 2p.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jay Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2988. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NEIL R MIKESKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights